Archive for the ‘The Economy’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

By The Objective Numbers

Friday, January 30th, 2009

By the objective numbers:  By John Yoak

  1. To my friends who are swept up by all the Obama-mania and socialist-loving-progressivism out there, who keep saying President Bush did some “Socialist” things too!… He did, Ok?
  2. President Bush proved he was, in fact, part “progressive”?…and did some wrong things in the final months of his presidency. As-if, your totally Marxist President Obama is okay? Two wrongs still don’t make a right. 
  3. The difference is, we were shocked as conservatives and saddened by President Bush’s move to the Left. However, President Obama shocks no one who knows his past record! Why?…Because he’s the “quintessential socialist”…or, like the self appointed enlightened ones call themselves and Obama, “progressive-liberal”…Yeah, like that somehow changes the historical truths about “Socialism, Marxism or Collectivism”. By any other name it’s all the same. And, it’s never worked anywhere! No, not even China. China’s capitalistic-communism is still “Communism”…American capitalistic-socialism won’t work either. It’s still “Socialism”…!
  4. For the record, conservatives were against the bailout. We don’t want socialism to succeed in making it’s way into American capitalism. It’s those kinds of policies we are against, whether they are Bush’s or Obama’s! Conservatives believe in allowing some to fail and the free market pendulum to balance itself out. Yes, while using “The Rule of Law”. 
  5. I believe in Milton Friedman’s laissez-faire economics style…where government is much less than 21% of GDP, today we’re heading past FDR’s record spending @35% of GDP and the stimulus bill etc will ad much more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Friedman …
  6. No…”progressives” are no more enlightened, anymore than “conservatives” are behind the times by standing up for capitalism, free markets & the Constitution! We’re not simply “old-school” who can’t adapt.
  7. Also, capitalism isn’t broken or recently failed and it hasn’t been unfettered since FDR threw the “new-deal” net over it. Actually, it’s been managed-markets for more than 100 years now. It’s intrusive big-gov’s disfunctionalism that’s broken, not capitalism. The Republican party is not synonymous with conservatism but, even so, there were many Republicans and Democrats opposed to the bailout. And while we do distain any scent of socialism [yes] the “bailouts & stimulus” indeed reeks of it.
  8. Let’s be clear that it was Sec Paulson, a progressive-Keynesian style economist and former CEO Goldman Sachs, who presented the case for the initial bailout and lobbied President Bush & Congress, stating this was the answer to prevent a major economic meltdown (“crisis?” – over used word). Let’s also be clear that the Federal Reserve is not part of our federal government and that it is the Federal Reserve that controls our monetary policy and is now essentially controlling our fiscal policy as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics …
  9. No, it was NOT because of deregulation, quite the opposite. So while, yes, Bush approved of the bailout, I believe he granted too much autonomy to Sec Paulson by not paying enough attention while exiting Washington. Ultimately, he was forced to respond to Paulson’s public claims of pending economic doom if the bailout did not occur. Checkout his global view-points and China connections:> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Paulson … Furthermore,  we acknowledge the incestuous relationships between Paulson, Bernanke, Greenspan, Pelosi, Reid, Frank & Dodd (Congressional Banking Committee) and many other high ranking Federal Reserve and economic advisors, again mostly Keynesian-social-engineers, and their ties to the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).
  10. Now we come to the heart of it – The CRA initially was carried out by Sen. Barney Frank’s (It’s Uncle Barney – the Affordable Housing Sugar Daddy), using Acorn’s ground troops and implemented thru , Fannie/Freddie (quasi-gov organizations), Bear Sterns-Countrywide-WaMu, CitiGroup, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch etc, allof whom are conveniently the recipients of the big bailout. How interesting that Goldman Sachs and some of the other big banks have major investments in China…Sec. Paulson and Sec. Geithner (a tax cheat) just so happen to have lived in China and both speak fluent Chinese…Also, how ironic that China holds most of our debt by way of loans. More recently, the Feds like never before are running the printing presses to come up with the money (a “Ponsi scheme”). Are we the next Weimar Republic of mega-inflation? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_Republic
  11. So Paulson, Frank, Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, and Schumer teed the Keynesian ball up for President Obama: Now we see we’ve been duped, by recognizing the original bailouts only started the wheels of socialism rolling and conveniently provides cover while President Obama proceeds with transforming our economy by putting us at the same level of government spending as in Europe, under the guise of “stimulus”. He’s attempting to insert government like never before into the private sector. Just as FDR’s “new-deal” did in the 1930’s by squeezing out the private sector in favor of even bigger-government, and didn’t work…(8 years 17.2% median unemployment).
  12. This whole thing stinks. We are now under the radical leftists rule and big-government interventionism is now a reality, until it fails. While us poor saps can do nothing but watch our corrupt government in action, now led by the most radical leftist in American history who even within his first few days has proven his intent to move us as far left as possible and seemingly under the blessings and approval of the Federal Reserve. 
  13. President Obama is now taking on Rush Limbaugh….What? From the highest office in the free world? The President of the United Sates is worried about one private citizen’s influence because he can’t defeat his ideas (Saul Alinsky-Rules for Radicals)…Ridiculous, but no surprises there either, it’s classic Alyinsky! How small does that make the office of the Presidency? Pretty small…and petty!  I believe the “Fairness Doctrine” could be just around the corner….?
  14. The “stimulus bill” (“Porkulous bill”), which was formulated without any Republicans, announcing the closing of Gitmo and a tax cheat Treasury Sec Geithner’s appointment begins showing who President Obama is! Maybe that’s why his approvals have dropped over 15% in his first week…

…Keep-the-Faith, our God is bigger than the power mongers with their little god-complex’s, who we see before us today…Including the “false messiah President Obama”. Notice big (G) little (g)? Therein lies the big differences! No one is intended to set themselves up as a god.

John

p.s…Milton Freedman said, “The Fed [Fed Reserve] was largely responsible for converting what might have been a garden-variety recession, although perhaps a fairly severe one, into a major catastrophe. Instead of using its powers to offset the depression, it presided over a decline in the quantity of money by one-third from 1929 to 1933 … Far from the depression being a failure of the free-enterprise system, it was a tragic failure of government.”  http://carriedaway.blogs.com/carried_away/2003/10/us_government_s.html

Posted in The Economy, US Politics | No Comments »

Ushering in the error of Obama

Friday, January 23rd, 2009

THE FOUNDATION

“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” –James Madison

PATRIOT PERSPECTIVE

Ushering in the error of Obama

By Mark Alexander

Presidential oath – redux

The inauguration-ordination-coronation of Barack Obama on Tuesday was heralded by his fawning media as nothing less than a “messianic” revival, with endless inaugural balls and star-studded celebrations on either end.

Strange, but I seem to recall that the Leftmedia skewered George W. Bush for spending almost $40 million on his first inauguration, proclaiming the events to be “grotesque” and all about “excess.”

But with deficit spending estimated to fly past the trillion-dollar mark in Obama’s first year in office, not one of his media sycophants has questioned the cost of this week’s events. Perhaps that is because it cost a mere $.00017 trillion, or about $1.25 million for each of the 130 tons of garbage his constituents dumped on the Mall.

All this was apparently not enough funding, however, to provide for his attendance at the Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball, which has been attended by every president since its inception 56 years ago. The event, hosted by the American Legion, the Military Order of Purple Hearts, and Paralyzed Veterans for America, recognizes their service and was attended by 48 of the nation’s 99 living Medal of Honor recipients. This is the 50th anniversary of the Medal of Honor Society.

Of course, it might be deemed indecorous to question the cost to inaugurate the first “African-American” president. (I hyphenated Obama’s heritage because, unlike 99 percent of blacks in America who are native to this land, one of Obama’s parents was actually African.)

Millions across the nation and around the world were watching as the climactic moment of the festivities arrived — the part where Barack Hussein Obama interrupted Chief Justice John Roberts just four words into the oath, then choked as he vowed to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Who could have predicted that? (Justice Roberts administered the oath of office again, Tuesday evening, in the Oval Office. Reportedly, Obama waited for his cue the second time around.)

To put Obama’s inaugural address into context, consider this proclamation at his kick-off celebration in Philadelphia: “What is required is a new declaration of independence, not just in our nation, but in our own lives…” While he spells out his vision for that “new declaration” for our nation in his inaugural speech, I can only presume that his reference to “in our own lives” means rehab for those of us who are “bitterly clinging to guns and religion.”

As a public service, we analyzed Obama’s speech with The Patriot’s proprietary Leftspeak decoder software, using it to translate his speech into Rightspeak so that our fellow Americans might more fully understand what he was saying. I selected a few excerpts from our analysis for your consideration.

BHO: “My fellow citizens,” Apostles and disciples of hope and change,

“On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.” Disagree with me and you must be racist or ignorant, or both.

“Our Founding Fathers … drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man … and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake.” But we will overwrite them with judicial diktats until my rule is the rule of law.

“What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them — that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.” Our founders are dead and so is their vision for our nation.

“In the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things.” Disagree with me and you are in violation of Scripture.

“We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth…” Let’s not offend anyone with the simple and undeniable truth that our national heritage rests on a Judeo-Christian foundation.

“Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some…” Blame our badly weakened economy on Wall Street greed and irresponsibility rather than Democrats in Congress.

“The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act … to lay a new foundation for growth.” Government growth…

“The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works.” More government growth…

“Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill … but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control.” We must not only grow the government, but also ensure that it regulates every aspect of the economy.

“The nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous.” Darwin had it right, except in regard to human nature and free market capitalism.

“A new era of responsibility…” An era in which the fiscally responsible will bear an ever-greater tax burden for those of us who are not…

“Less measurable, but no less profound, is a sapping of confidence across our land; a nagging fear that America’s decline is inevitable, that the next generation must lower its sights.” The crisis of confidence and propagation of fear was the staple of my campaign rhetoric, and it was largely responsible for my election.

“Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.” I will remake America into Amerika.

“We will restore science to its rightful place.” Global warming hysteria is a great catalyst for expanding government control.

“The world has changed, and we must change with it.” Out with national sovereignty and in with the New World Order…

“Power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please.” Appeasement works…

“Our security emanates from the justness of our cause; the force of our example; the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.” Appeasement really works…

“To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.” To the Islamic terrorists, we seek to appease you.

“To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.” Except for my mentors Frank Marshall Davis, Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers, and my colleagues in the Democrat Party, the Socialist New Party, the ACORN crowd, Rod Blagojevich, Richard Daley, Saul Alinsky, Father Michael Pfleger, Khalid al-Mansour, Kwame Kilpatrick, Louis Farrakhan, Rashid Khalidi and Raila Odinga. You guys can just keep up the good work.

“This is the source of our confidence: the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.” I am calling on you to follow me.

Obama ended his speech with the last of several references to our Founders, calling on Americans to remember the words “the father of our nation” delivered to troops: “Let it be told to the future world … that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive… that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it].”

Of course, those words were written by Thomas Paine on 23 December 1776 in his work, “The American Crisis,” which, indeed, George Washington ordered read to his Patriot countrymen on the eve of the Battle of Trenton.

Paine’s pamphlet, which begins famously, “These are the times that try men’s souls…” was about the animating contest for freedom and liberty from government oppression.

However, Obama’s entire treatise on the role of government, “a new declaration of independence … a new foundation for growth … a watchful eye … a new era of responsibility … remaking America,” contradicts everything that Patriots have died for since our Declaration of Independence.

Our Founders outlined their just cause for revolution with these words: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”

During the next four years, every thoughtful American will come to learn that Barack Hussein Obama is no friend of freedom and liberty; that his “vision for America” is the antithesis of that held by our Founders.

George Washington admonished future generations to “Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism.”

Indeed.

Tags:,
Posted in Campaign 2008, Liberal Agenda, Media Bias, The Economy | No Comments »

Media Bias – It’s For Real

Tuesday, January 20th, 2009

Headlines on this date 4 years ago:“Republicans spending $42 million on inauguration while troops die in unarmored Humvees”

“Bush extravagance exceeds any reason during tough economic times”

“Fat cats get their $42 million inauguration party, ordinary Americans get the shaft”

Headlines Today:

“Historic Obama inauguration will cost only $120 million”

“Obama spends $120 million on inauguration; America needs A Big Party”

“Everyman Obama shows America how to celebrate”

“Citibank executives contribute $8 million to Obama inauguration”

Tags:,
Posted in Campaign 2008, Media Bias, The Economy | No Comments »

Questions Holder Needs To Answer

Thursday, January 15th, 2009

Questions Holder Needs To Answer

by  Jed Babbin

01/14/2009

Eric Holder — President-elect Obama’s choice for attorney general — displays a liberal ideology which often conflicts with the Constitution, the war on terror, and common sense. Tomorrow, Holder will face the first of what may be several sessions of his confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The Attorney General is the chief law enforcement officer of the United States. Before Holder’s nomination is voted on by the committee, he should answer searching inquiries that may reveal his unfitness for that post.

Going through Holder’s record is a huge task, but some of his speeches, legal writings and other actions — as investigated by a House committee almost seven years ago — quickly reveal some of the most important questions. Holder should be required to answer the following questions in the very first hearing.

The Second Amendment: In the landmark DC v. Heller case, Holder was one of the people — the clients, not the lawyers — on whose behalf an amicus curiae brief was filed in support of the D.C. gun ban. The brief said, in part:

“Amici disagree with the current position of the United States Department of Justice that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for purposes unrelated to a State’s operation of a well-regulated militia.”

Question for Holder: The Supreme Court amicus brief shows you have a strong personal disagreement with the decision upholding the individual’s right to keep and bear arms. As Attorney General, will you work to overturn the DC v. Heller decision and to limit it in the lower courts and Congress?

2. Constitutional Rights for Terrorist Detainees: In a June 13, 2008, speech to the American Constitution Society, Holder spoke of the Supreme Court’s decision in Boumediene v. Bush which for the first time granted habeas corpus rights to terrorist detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. (Justice Scalia, in his dissent, said the decision “…will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.”)

In his speech, Holder said of the Boumediene decision, “The very recent Supreme Court decision, by only a 5 to 4 vote, concerning habeas corpus and Guantanamo is an important first step but we must go much farther.”

Question for Holder: Boumediene was a radical departure even from earlier Supreme Court decisions on the subject and from the law of war going back to the founding of the United States. Tell us specifically how you would like the law to go farther, in what regards, and — again, specifically — what more Constitutional rights should be extended to terrorist detainees?

3. Clinton’s Last-Minute Pardon of Fugitive Financier Marc Rich: According to a May 2002 report by the House Committee on Government Reform, “Eric Holder’s support of the Rich pardon played a critical role in the success of the pardon effort. Holder informed the White House that he was ‘neutral, leaning towards favorable’ on the Rich pardon, even though he knew that Rich was a fugitive from justice and that Justice Department prosecutors viewed Rich with such contempt that they would no longer meet with his lawyers. Holder has failed to offer any credible justification for his support of the Rich pardon, leading the Committee to believe that Holder had other motivations for his decision, which he has failed to share with the Committee.”

As Deputy Attorney General, Holder was the boss of the Justice Department pardon attorney.

The Rich pardon was the result of direct lobbying of the White House by Rich lawyer Jack Quinn, who Rich apparently hired on Holder’s recommendation. The House Committee report also says that Holder was seeking Quinn’s support to be appointed Attorney General in an Al Gore administration. Several critical questions come from this:

Questions for Holder:

a. Give us the time, date and every detail you can remember of any conversations you have ever had with Jack Quinn regarding whether or how he would help you achieve the post of U.S. Attorney General. (If he needs to be reminded, there’s a bundle of e-mails and references to testimony in the House report.)

b. According to the House committee report, the following people either asserted their rights under the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination or refused to cooperate with the Committee’s investigation: Marc Rich, Denise Rich, Terry McAuliffe, Beth Dozoretz, Pincus Green and Avner Azulay. Jack Quinn is also listed as uncooperative. Give us the time, date, and every detail you can remember of any conversations regarding the Rich pardon you had with each of these people.

c. Why did you recommend to a friend of Marc Rich that he hire Jack Quinn?

4. Other Problem Pardons and Commutations: FALN and Former Weather Underground Members: There is a very disturbing pattern emerging from Holder’s involvement in pardons. One of the charges against Marc Rich was trading with Iran during the time it was holding U.S. hostages in Tehran. He also was instrumental in obtaining commutation of sentences for unrepentant FALN terrorists (Puerto Ricans who had bombed and pardons for members of the Weather Underground).

According to a January 9, 2009, LA Times report, “16 members of the FALN (the Spanish acronym for Armed Forces of National Liberation) and Los Macheteros had been convicted in Chicago and Hartford variously of bank robbery, possession of explosives and participating in a seditious conspiracy. Overall, the two groups had been linked by the FBI to more than 130 bombings, several armed robberies, six slayings and hundreds of injuries.” The same LA Times report says Holder’s chief of staff directed the pardon attorney to revise his recommendation from negative to neutral on the FALN commutation.

Questions for Holder:

a. Why were the FALN terrorists deserving of commutation of sentences?

b. There is a very troubling pattern emerging here. You consistently argue for leniency and additional Constitutional rights for terrorists. Why is the well-being of convicted FALN terrorists apparently more important in your judgment than the right of the survivors of their victims to see them punished fully?

5. The Fairness Doctrine: In a June 2004 speech — again to an American Constitution Society group — Holder spoke about the difficulties of convincing people to support the liberal agenda. He said:

“In the short term, this will not be an easy task. With the mainstream media cowered (sic) by conservative critics, and the conservative media disseminating the news in anything but a fair and balanced manner, and you know what I mean there, the means to reach the greatest number of people is not easily accessible.”

Question for Holder: The so-called “Fairness Doctrine” is a relic of the 1940s. It allowed federal bureaucrats to regulate the content of radio broadcasts on an ideological basis to ensure “balance.” President Reagan did away with it in 1987. Do you think a law or regulation that re-imposed the “Fairness Doctrine” would be Constitutional today?

And that’s only for the first day. Stay tuned.

Tags:
Posted in 2nd Amendment, Campaign 2008, Fairness Doctrine, Foreign Policy, The Economy | No Comments »

Message to the Big Three Automakers

Saturday, January 10th, 2009

In response to your request to contact legislators and ask for a bailout for the Big Three automakers please consider the following, and please pass my thoughts on to Troy Clark, President of General Motors North America.

Politicians and Management of the Big 3 are both infected with the s ame entitlement mentality that has spread like cancerous germs in UAW halls for the last countless decades, and whose plague is now sweeping this nation, awaiting our new “messiah”, Pres-elect Obama, to wave his magic wand and make all our problems go away, while at the same time allowing our once great nation to keep “living the dream”. Believe me folks, The dream is over!

This dream where we can ignore the consumer for years while management myopically focuses on its personal rewards packages at the same time that our factories have been filled w ith the worlds most overpaid, arrogant, ignorant and laziest entitlement minded “laborers” without paying the price for these atrocities this dream where you still think the masses will line up to buy our products for ever and ever.

Don’t even think about telling me I’m wrong.  Don’t accuse me of not knowing of what I speak.  I have called on Ford, GM, Chrysler, TRW, Delphi, Kelsey Hayes, American Axle and countless other automotive OEM’s throughout the Midwest during the past 30 years and what I’ve seen over those years in these union shops can only be described as disgusting.

Troy Clarke, President of General Motors North America, states: “There is widespread sentiment throughout this country, and our government, and especially via the news media, that the current crisis is completely the result of bad management which it certainly is not.”

You’re right Mr. Clarke, it’s not JUST management, how about the electricians who walk around the plants like lords in feudal times, making people wait on them for countless hours while they drag ass so they can come in on the weekend and make double and triple time for a job they easily could have done within their normal 40 hour work week.  How about the line workers who threaten newbies with all kinds of scare tactics for putting out too many parts on a shift and for being too productive

(We certainly must not expose those lazy bums who have been getting overpaid for decades for their horrific underproduction, must we?!?)

Do you folks really not know about this stuff?!?  How about this great sentiment abridged from Mr.  Clarke’s sad plea: “over the last few years we have closed the quality and efficiency gaps with our competitors.”  What the hell has Detroit been doing for the last 40 years?!?  Did we really JUST wake up to the gaps in quality and efficiency between us and them?  The K car vs.  the Accord?  The Pinto vs.  the Civic?!?  Do I need to go on?  What a joke!

We are living through the inevitable outcome of the actions of the United States auto industry for decades.  It’s time to pay for your sins, Detroit.

I attended an economic summit last week where brilliant economist, Alan Beaulieu, from the Institute of Trend Research, surprised the crowd when he said he would not have given the banks a penny of “bailout money”.  “Yes, he said, this would cause short term problems, but despite what people like politicians and corporate magnates would have us believe, the sun would in fact rise the next day and the following very important thing would happen where there had been greedy and sloppy banks, new efficient ones would pop up that is how a free market system works it does work if we would only let it work”.

But for some nondescript reason we are now deciding that the rest of the world is right and that capitalism doesn’t work – that we need the government to step in and “save us”. Save us my ass, Hell – we’re nationalizing and unfortunately too many of our once fine nation’s citizens don’t even have a clue that this is what is really happening. But, they sure can tell you the stats on their favorite sports teams yeah – THAT’S really important, isn’t it.

Does it ever occur to ANYONE that the “competition” has been producing vehicles, EXTREMELY PROFITABLY, for decades in this country?…  How can that be???  Let’s see Fuel efficient. Listening to customers and investing in the proper tooling and automation for the long haul.

Not being too complacent or arrogant to listen to Dr. W. Edwards Deming four decades ago when he taught that by adopting appropriate principles of management, organizations could increase quality and simultaneously reduce costs. Ever increased productivity through quality and intelligent planning. Treating vendors like strategic partners, rather than like “the enemy”. Efficient front and back offices, Non union environment

Again, I could go on and on, but I really wouldn’t be telling anyone anything they really don’t already know down deep in their hearts.

I have six children, so I am not unfamiliar with the concept of wanting someone to bail you out of a mess that you have gotten yourself into – my children do this on a weekly, if not daily basis, as I did when I was their age.  I do for them what my parents did for me (one of their greatest gifts, by the way) – I make them stand on their own two feet and accept the consequences of their actions and work through it.  Radical concept, huh.    Am I there for them in the wings?  Of course – but only until such time as they need to be fully on their own as adults.

I don’t want to oversimplify a complex situation, but there certainly are unmistakable parallels here between the proper role of parenting and government.   Detroit and the United States need to pay for their sins.  Bad news people – it’s coming whether we like it or not. The newly elected Messiah really doesn’t have a magic wand big enough to “make it all go away.”  I laughed as I heard Obama “reeling it back in” almost immediately after the final vote count was tallied”.. We really might not do it in a year or in four”. Where the Hell was that kind of talk when he was RUNNING for office.

Stop trying to put off the inevitable folks. That house in Florida really isn’t worth $750,000. People who jump across a border really don’t deserve free health care benefits. That job driving that forklift for the Big 3 really isn’t worth $85,000 a year. We really shouldn’t allow Wal-Mart to stock their shelves with products acquired from a country that unfairly manipulates their currency and has the most atrocious human rights infractions on the face of the globe.

That couple whose combined income is less than $50,000 really shouldn’t be living in that $485,000 home. Let the market correct itself folks – it will.  Yes it will be painful, but it’s gonna’ be painful either way, and the bright side of my proposal is that on the other side of it all, is a nation that appreciates what it has and doesn’t live beyond its means and gets back to basics and redevelops the patriotic work ethic that made it the greatest nation in the history of the world and probably turns back to God.

Sorry – don’t cut my head off, I’m just the messenger sharing with you the “bad news”. I hope you take it to heart.

Gregory J. Knox, President Knox Machinery, Inc. Franklin , Ohio 45005

Tags:, ,
Posted in Bail-Out, The Economy | 1 Comment »

No He Can’t

Wednesday, January 7th, 2009

Anne Wortham is Associate Professor of Sociology at Illinois State University and continuing Visiting Scholar at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. She is a member of the American Sociological Association and the American Philosophical Association. She has been a John M. Olin Foundation Faculty Fellow, and honored as a Distinguished Alumni of the Year by the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education. In fall 1988 she was one of a select group of intellectuals who were featured in Bill Moyer’s television series, “A World of Ideas.” The transcript of her conversation with Moyers has been published in his book, A World of Ideas. Dr. Wortham is author of The Other Side of  Racism: A Philosophical Study of Black Race Consciousness which analyzes how race consciousness is transformed into political strategies and policy issues. She has published numerous articles on the implications of individual rights for civil rights policy, and is currently writing a book on theories of social and cultural marginality. Recently, she has published articles on the significance of multiculturalism and Afrocentricism in education, the politics of victimization and the social and political impact of political correctness. Shortly after an interview in 2004 she was awarded tenure.

This article by her is something else.

No He Can’t
by Anne Wortham

Fellow Americans,

Please know: I am black; I grew up in the segregated South. I did not vote for Barack Obama; I wrote in Ron Paul’s name as my choice for president. Most importantly, I am not race conscious. I do not require a black president to know that I am a person of worth, and that life is worth living. I do not require a black president to love the ideal of America. I cannot join you in your celebration. I feel no elation. There is no smile on my face. I am not jumping with joy. There are no tears of triumph in my eyes. For such emotions  and behavior to come from me, I would have to deny all that I know about the requirements of human flourishing and survival,  all that I know about the history of the United States of America, all that I know about American race relations, and all that I know about Barack Obama as a politician. I would have to deny the nature of the “change” that Obama asserts has come to America. Most importantly, I would have to abnegate my certain understanding that you have chosen to sprint down the road to serfdom that we have been on for over a century. I would have to pretend that individual liberty has no value for the success of a human life. I would have to evade your rejection of the slender reed of capitalism on which your success and mine depend. I would have to think it somehow rational that 94 percent of the 12 million blacks in this country voted for a man because he looks like them (that blacks are permitted to play the race card), and that they were joined by self-declared “progressive” whites who voted for him because he doesn’t look like them. I would have to be wipe my mind clean of all that I know about the kind of people who have advised and taught Barack Obama and will fill posts in his administration.  Political intellectuals like my former colleagues at the Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.

I would have to believe that “fairness” is the equivalent of justice. I would have to believe that man who asks me to “go forward in a new spirit of service, in a new service of sacrifice” is speaking in my interest. I would have to accept the premise of a man that economic prosperity comes from the “bottom up,” and who arrogantly believes that he can will it into existence by the use of government force. I would have to admire a man who thinks the standard of living of the masses can be improved by destroying the most productive and the generators of wealth.

Finally, Americans, I would have to erase from my consciousness the scene of 125,000 screaming, crying, cheering people in Grant Park, Chicago irrationally chanting “Yes We Can!” Finally, I would have to wipe all memory of all the times I have heard politicians, pundits, journalists, editorialists, bloggers and intellectuals declare that capitalism is dead  and no one, including especially Alan Greenspan, objected to their assumption that the particular version of the anti-capitalistic mentality that they want to replace with their own version of anti-capitalism is anything remotely equivalent to capitalism.

So you have made history, Americans. You and your children have elected a black man to the office of the president of the United States, the wounded giant of the world. The battle between John Wayne and Jane Fonda is over and that Fonda won. Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern must be very happy men. Jimmie Carter, too. And the Kennedys have at last gotten their Kennedy look-a-like. The self-righteous welfare  statists in the suburbs can feel warm moments of satisfaction for having elected a black person. So, toast yourselves: 60s countercultural radicals, 80s yuppies and 90s bourgeois bohemians. Toast yourselves, Black America. Shout your glee Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Duke, Stanford, and Berkeley. You have elected not an individual who is qualified to be president, but a black man who, like the pragmatist Franklin Roosevelt, promises to Do Something! You now have someone who has picked up the baton of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society. But you have also foolishly traded your freedom and mine what little there is left  for the chance to feel good. There is nothing in me that can share your happy obliviousness.

Tags:, ,
Posted in Campaign 2008, Media Bias, The Economy | No Comments »

The Tax Poem

Wednesday, December 31st, 2008

At first, I thought this was funny…

Tax his land, Tax his bed,

Tax the table, At which he’s fed.

Tax his tractor, Tax his mule,

Teach him taxes, Are the rule.

Tax his work, Tax his pay,

He works for peanuts, Anyway!

Tax his cow, Tax his goat,

Tax his pants, Tax his coat.

Tax his ties, Tax his shirt,

Tax his work, Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink,

Tax him if he tries to think.

Tax his cigars, Tax his beers,

If he cries, Tax his tears.

Tax his car, Tax his gas,

Find other ways To tax his ass.

Tax all he has Then let him know

That you won’t be done Till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers, Tax him some more,

Tax him ’til He’s good and sore.

Then tax his coffin, Tax his grave,

Tax the sod in which he’s laid.

Put these words upon his tomb, ‘Taxes drove me to my doom…’

When he’s gone, do not relax, Its time to apply the inheritance tax.

Think about this:

Accounts Receivable Tax – Building Permit Tax – CDL license Tax – Cigarette Tax Corporate Income Tax – Dog License Tax – Excise Taxes Federal Income Tax – Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) Fishing License Tax – Food License Tax – Fuel Permit Tax Gasoline Tax (44.75 cents per gallon) – FUTA Tax – Gross Receipts Tax Hunting License Tax – Inheritance Tax – Intangible Tax – Inventory Tax – IRS Interest Charges – IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax) – Liquor Tax – Luxury Taxes – Marriage License Tax – Tax Medicare Tax – Occupational Tax – Personal Property Tax – Property Tax Real Estate Tax – Service Charge Tax – Social Security Tax – Road Usage Tax – Sales Tax – Recreation Tax – Recreational Vehicle Tax – School Tax – State Income Tax – State Unemployment Tax – SUTA Tax – Telephone Federal Excise Tax – Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee – Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax Telephone Recurring and Non- recurring Charges Tax Telephone State and Local Tax Telephone Usage Charge Tax – Utility Taxes – Vehicle License Registration Tax – Vehicle Sales Tax – Watercraft Registration Tax – Well Permit Tax – Workers Compensation Tax

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous on the planet. We had no national debt, had the largest middleclass in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

Tags:,
Posted in Taxes, The Economy | No Comments »

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved

Monday, December 29th, 2008

By Christopher Booker
Last Updated: 7:40AM GMT 29 Dec 2008

Polar bear

Polar bears will be fine after all Photo: AP

The first, on May 21, headed “Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts” , reported that the entire Alpine “winter sports industry” could soon “grind to a halt for lack of snow”. The second, on December 19, headed “The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation” , reported that this winter’s Alpine snowfalls “look set to beat all records by New Year’s Day”.

Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.

First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.

Ever shriller and more frantic has become the insistence of the warmists, cheered on by their army of media groupies such as the BBC, that the last 10 years have been the “hottest in history” and that the North Pole would soon be ice-free – as the poles remain defiantly icebound and those polar bears fail to drown. All those hysterical predictions that we are seeing more droughts and hurricanes than ever before have infuriatingly failed to materialise.

Even the more cautious scientific acolytes of the official orthodoxy now admit that, thanks to “natural factors” such as ocean currents, temperatures have failed to rise as predicted (although they plaintively assure us that this cooling effect is merely “masking the underlying warming trend”, and that the temperature rise will resume worse than ever by the middle of the next decade).

Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a “scientific consensus” in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world’s most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that “consensus” which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.

Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades, harsh reality at last began to break in on those self-deluding dreams which have for so long possessed almost every politician in the western world. As we saw in this month’s Poznan conference, when 10,000 politicians, officials and “environmentalists” gathered to plan next year’s “son of Kyoto” treaty in Copenhagen, panicking politicians are waking up to the fact that the world can no longer afford all those quixotic schemes for “combating climate change” with which they were so happy to indulge themselves in more comfortable times.

Suddenly it has become rather less appealing that we should divert trillions of dollars, pounds and euros into the fantasy that we could reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 80 per cent. All those grandiose projects for “emissions trading”, “carbon capture”, building tens of thousands more useless wind turbines, switching vast areas of farmland from producing food to “biofuels”, are being exposed as no more than enormously damaging and futile gestures, costing astronomic sums we no longer possess.

As 2009 dawns, it is time we in Britain faced up to the genuine crisis now fast approaching from the fact that – unless we get on very soon with building enough proper power stations to fill our looming “energy gap” – within a few years our lights will go out and what remains of our economy will judder to a halt. After years of infantile displacement activity, it is high time our politicians – along with those of the EU and President Obama’s US – were brought back with a mighty jolt into contact with the real world.

I must end this year by again paying tribute to my readers for the wonderful generosity with which they came to the aid of two causes. First their donations made it possible for the latest “metric martyr”, the east London market trader Janet Devers, to fight Hackney council’s vindictive decision to prosecute her on 13 criminal charges, ranging from selling in pounds and ounces to selling produce “by the bowl” (to avoid using weights her customers dislike and don’t understand). The embarrassment caused by this historic battle has thrown the forced metrication policy of both our governments, in London and Brussels, into total disarray.

Since Hackney backed out of allowing four criminal charges against Janet to go before a jury next month, all that remains is for her to win her appeal in February against eight convictions which now look quite absurd (including those for selling veg by the bowl, as thousands of other London market traders do every day). The final goal, as Neil Herron of the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund insists, must then be a pardon for the late Steve Thoburn and the four other original “martyrs” who were found guilty in 2002 – after a legal battle also made possible by this column’s readers – of breaking laws so ridiculous that the EU Commission has even denied they existed (but which are still on the statute book).

Readers were equally generous this year in rushing to the aid of Sue Smith, whose son was killed in a Snatch Land Rover in Iraq in 2005. Their contributions made it possible for her to carry on with the High Court action she has brought against the Ministry of Defence, with the sole aim of calling it to account for needlessly risking soldiers’ lives by sending them into battle in hopelessly inappropriate vehicles. Thanks not least to Mrs Smith’s determined fight, the Snatch Land Rover scandal, first reported here in 2006, has at last become a national cause celebre.

May I finally thank all those readers who have written to me in 2008 – so many that, as usual, it has not been possible to answer all their messages. But their support and information has been hugely appreciated. May I wish them and all of you a happy (if globally not too warm) New Year.

Tags:,
Posted in Global Warming, The Economy | No Comments »

Letter from Granddad

Tuesday, December 23rd, 2008

Guess you heard that 68% of “the youth vote” went to Obama.  My granddaughter called this morning to tell me she was one of them.  I replied with this e-mail:

Sweetheart, The election of Obama comes down to this.  Your grandmother and I, your mother and other productive wage earning tax payers will have their taxes increased and that means less income.  Less income means we will have to cut back on basic purchases, gifts and handouts.  That includes firing the Hispanic lady who cleans our house twice a month.

She just lost her job.  We can’t afford her anymore.

What is the economic effect of Obama’s election on you personally?

Over the years, your grandmother and I have given you thousands of dollars in food, housing, cash, clothing, gifts, etc., etc.  By your vote, you have chosen another family over ours for help.  So in the future, if you need assistance with your rent, money for gas, tires for your car, someone to bring you lunch, etc.  ..  call 202-456-1111.  That’s the telephone number for the Office of the President of the United States.  I’m sure Mr. Obama will be happy to send a check from his personal or business accounts or leave cash in an envelope taped to his front door.

It’s like this.  Those who vote for the president should consider what the impact of an election will be on the nation as a whole and not just be concerned with what they can get for themselves (welfare, etc.).  What Obama voters don’t seem to realize is that the government’s money comes from taxes collected from taxpaying families.  Raising taxes on productive people means they will have less money to spend on their families.

Congratulations on your choice.  For future reference, you might attempt to add up all you’ve received from us, your mom, Mike’s parents and others and compare it to what you expect to get over the next four years from Mr.  Obama.
To congratulate Mr.  Obama and to make sure you’re on the list for handouts, write to:

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington DC 20500

P.S.  Love you, but call the number listed above when you need help.

Granddad

Tags:, ,
Posted in Campaign 2008, Humor, The Economy | No Comments »

Say something nice about Obama

Saturday, December 13th, 2008

“Say something nice about Obama.”
 
This challenge came at a party from a good-natured self-described “rabid Obama supporter.” Normally, when off the clock, I avoid this kind of stuff. How different is it to, say, approach a physician in a social setting and say: “Doc, my knee hurts in the morning. What do you think it is?” But the guy seemed nice enough.

“OK,” I said. “Obama is likable. He means well. He appears to be a good father and a faithful and loving husband.”
 
“That’s it?”
 
“You asked me to say something good. I just did.”
 
“Aren’t you leaving something out?”
 
“I’ll bite,” I said. “What?”
 
“Well, you left out something that’s pretty obvious. The man is extremely intelligent, don’t you think?”
 
“I make a distinction,” I said, “between intelligence and wisdom, intelligence and judgment, and intelligence and common sense. Obama attended elite schools and did well enough at Harvard to become president of the law review and graduate magna cum laude. But…”
 
“But?”
 
“But my 93-year-old Republican father, who only finished the eighth grade until going back to get his GED in his late 30s, has more judgment, wisdom and common sense. My father never spent one minute in the auto industry and does not think he could run it. Obama thinks government can. My father thinks if you lend or borrow money irresponsibly, you shouldn’t be ‘saved’ by taxpayers. Obama — and a whole bunch of Republicans — think they should.”
 
“It’s about helping people,” my “rabid” friend said.
 
“My friend, economist Thomas Sowell, told me that whenever government wants to ‘do something,’ ask yourself three questions. 1) Who pays for it? 2) How much will it cost? 3) Will it work? With this brief analysis, Sowell said, one almost always finds ‘something’ is not worth it, is wrongheaded, or makes things worse.
 
“Who pays?” I continued. “Taxpayers do — either through higher taxes, borrowed money to be repaid with higher taxes, or printing money that creates inflation and higher interest rates.”
 
“The cost?” he asked.
 
“Well, last Sunday morning, Obama appeared on Meet the Press,” I said. “He offered a massive ‘infrastructure’ program, a New Deal II. The cost? Obama said his economic team is working on that. So far, the amount of government money spent or expects to spend — on FDIC insurance and to rescue banks, borrowers, insurance companies and investment firms, as well as the auto industry — exceeds $7 trillion or $8 trillion.
 
“Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson initially proposed $700 billion under TARP, the Troubled Assets Relief Program,” I continued. “But wait, Paulson then said no, it’s not a good idea to spend the money on troubled assets — better to spend the money on buying stock in financial institutions. So within weeks, the central premise of the bailout — the need to purchase ‘toxic’ assets held by financial institutions — was thrown out the window.”
 
My friend and I were now drawing a crowd.
 
“Paulson told us,” I said, “that lenders needed money in order to unlock the ‘credit freeze.’ But banks instead used the money to clean up their own balance sheets or to purchase other banks — completely contrary to the stated purpose of providing them cash infusions. And now Obama wants to ‘put people to work’ on government infrastructure projects. He wants to ‘modernize’ school and federal buildings. He wants to invest in technologies to create ‘green’ jobs.”
 
“How do you know it won’t work?” he asked.
 
“Well, years into the Great Depression, FDR’s secretary of the treasury, Henry Morgenthau, declared (quoted here verbatim): ‘We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work….We have never made good on our promises….I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started…and an enormous debt to boot!’
 
“So this has been tried, and many economists believe that the spending, along with other dumb government actions, prolonged and possibly deepened the problems and certainly did not solve them.”
 
“So what’s the answer?” he asked.
 
“Well, back to my dad. Mind you, he does not read The Wall Street Journal or Investor’s Business Daily or Forbes magazine. I recently asked him the same question.
 
“‘It seems to me the government’s just too d— big,’ said my Depression-era/World War II-veteran father. ‘I’d let people keep their own money. They’ll figure it out. They always do.'”
 
“But,” I repeated, “Obama certainly is likable.”

Larry Elder – Syndicated Columnist – 12/11/2008 10:15:00 AM

Tags:, ,
Posted in Campaign 2008, The Economy | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »